John Smith I wrote:
Buck wrote:

...
the spammers will love this, but he will regret your posting his url
openly.

Naaa ...

He works at a university, trust me, if he can't stop the spam from being
in his mailbox, a co-worker/student can!

Ever try gmail? That one simple tool allows me to freely give out my
email ... if the spammers get though it, I will evoke other counter
measures ... spam is only a problem for the computer illiterate ...


Who ever head of posting url's in a newsgroup? (joke)


That page appears to be the original one that came out in 2004. It's
missing one part though. In the original release, there was a mention of
how efficient the antenna was, proof cited was how when he turned the
power up to 100 watts, the antenna melted. That part is gone. I googled
up the thread to see if my memory was bad, but it wasn't. The release
must have been revised.

So has there been a breakthrough in how the antenna maintains a
constant current through it? Can we assume the voltage must be constant
also?



- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Michael Coslo wrote:
So has there been a breakthrough in how the antenna maintains a
constant current through it? Can we assume the voltage must be constant
also?

If the ends of a 1/2WL dipole are terminated to
ground by ~1000 ohm resistors, the antenna current
is relatively constant. :-)
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

Cecil Moore wrote:

...
If the ends of a 1/2WL dipole are terminated to
ground by ~1000 ohm resistors, the antenna current
is relatively constant. :-)

Cecil:

In one of the configurations of a 1/2 wave, the bottom helix and length
of the straight length of radiator ends up right at ~8.1 ft. The upper
loading coil and top-hat/upper-radiator ends up being ~8.1 ft. This,
most likely, helps to force the current into that upper loading coil.
As, Robert Vincent, has mentioned something about "storing" the rf
energy in the bottom helix with the effect of it having a relationship
to "driving" the upper portion of the antenna.

I don't know, he has offered me a CD with complete data on the antenna,
I am arranging a anonymous address to have the CD shipped to now ...

JS

John Smith I wrote:

[stuff]

Actually, I got those figs wrong, I am late to a meeting, can't find the
paper with the final/optimized lengths/ratios/dia/turns for 10m ... I'll
send post/email 'em later today so as to have it right--just in case
there is one guy with the energy curiosity to kludge one together ...

Most important thing, I can tell, is the ratio of inductance between the
coils--my final length of all coils/radiators if .333% of full 1/2 half
.... a darn good mobile antenna!

JS

Michael Coslo wrote:
... It's
missing one part though. In the original release, there was a mention of
how efficient the antenna was, proof cited was how when he turned the
power up to 100 watts, the antenna melted. That part is gone. I googled
...
- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Actually, if you don't get the coils in the proper ratio/position to
each other, efficiency drops DRAMATICALLY!

Like usual, the best configuration to give the best reception of a known
and stable signal also results in the antenna being to configured to
achieve maximum radiation ...

Or simply, if the antenna isn't performing as a full length 1/2
wave--reconfigure 'till it does! Which, using the test fixture I
supplied, is done quickly with no problem ...

JS